this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2025
419 points (99.1% liked)

politics

25634 readers
2608 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Free speech advocates are sounding the alarm about a bill in the US House of Representatives that they fear could allow Secretary of State Marco Rubio to strip US citizens of their passports based purely on political speech.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), will come up for a hearing on Wednesday.

all 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 66 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This won't pass the Senate, but it shows why if we're able to wrest power back from the Confederates they can never gain power again. Each time they move the Overton window right, and next time they'd just pick up right where they left off. That's why it's all the more important that we elect progressives—to drag the window back to the left.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 15 points 1 day ago (3 children)

How do you propose confederates not gaining power when their ideas are not only popular but celebrated and worshipped?

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Their ideas aren't popular, Trump won because the economy sucks the Democratic party sucks and the media sucks. Fix any of those three problems up a bit and they lose.

All easier said than done, but let's define the problem properly. It isn't that people on average are bad and can't handle democracy, it's that our systems are bad and manipulating people into supporting bad things.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago

He also rigged the election

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 5 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Xenophobia seems pretty popular.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

And why is xenophobia popular? Seems like a problem with the systems still.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 18 hours ago
[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Eh. Trump was able to make a very specific and tangible case to his voters for how he was going to directly improve their lives. Kamala was completely unwilling to do that. That's why she lost.

Trump's plan was evil, but it was clear and direct. His message was "I will deport a bunch of immigrants and slap up tariffs. This will make it easier for you to get a job and buy a home." It's a cynical, evil, and short-sighted plan, but it was actually a plan to directly improve the living standards of working class Americans.

What was Kamala's equivalent? Nothing. She had some vague language about a tax credit that would just inflate the housing bubble higher, and she took the usual idiot liberal approach of attaching dozens of strings that made it so only select marginalized people would qualify for it. Kamala offered nothing. People were hurting, and she offered them nothing. She didn't lose because of Gaza, no matter what Republican trolls on Lemmy like to say. She lost because she was unable to make a clear and specific case about how she was going to help the people that voted for her. Her only real core message was the defense of democracy, but it turns out that people see little reason to support a democracy that will do nothing to actually advance their interests.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Kamala failed in every way, imo, except wooing the farther-right. DNC sued to keep Claudia off the ballot in swing states --they knew they weren't going to win against her! And now they're suing to keep a Green mayoral candidate off the ballot. Lemmy libs act like South Carolina libs, which is pretty left except they "wisely" want conservative Dems on the ballot to win, and that hasn't worked since Clinton. The only reason Biden won't was because he wasn't the other guy, and failed the lower middle and underclass so badly, "not the other guy" will never win again, for less conservative libs of either party.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Hate to break it to you, but the green candidate is never winning within the 2-party fptp system. The last chance was Bernie 2020.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 11 hours ago

Certainly not with the DNC spending to keep her off the ballot.

[–] sudo@lemmy.today 5 points 23 hours ago

Gallows would be a strong start

[–] chilicheeselies@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Doesnt this clearly violate the 1st amendment?

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 36 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The Constitution doesn't matter anymore.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 21 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I see the value in documenting the ways it’s being violated, but every time I hear someone shocked because “they can’t do that” I’m reminded of how we got here. The only law and rule that matters is what is physically possible

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 11 points 22 hours ago

Exactly. It's only illegal if they enforce it, and they ain't gonna enforce shit.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

it got a 1 on its saving throw. sorry statesia

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Fun Fact: Freedom of Speech is "guaranteed" in the Constitution of PRC.

https://english.www.gov.cn/archive/lawsregulations/201911/20/content_WS5ed8856ec6d0b3f0e9499913.html

Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China shall enjoy freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration.

Guess how that's going.

(I mean you do have freedom of speech, you can say whatever you want, just not freedom after speech)

[–] ileftreddit@piefed.social 42 points 22 hours ago

To think we’re witnessing the repeal of the bill of rights, absolutely wild

[–] shiroininja@lemmy.world 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Just like China, well done magats. You are the thing you hate

[–] Red0ctober@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The thing they claim to hate, while secretly admiring it (or not so secretly)

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

"When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak." -donald trump

didnt even tried to hide it

[–] Steve@startrek.website 3 points 22 hours ago

What you interpreted as hate was actually envy.

[–] Jolly_Platypus@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] Red0ctober@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

"Terms and conditions may apply."

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And the home of the slave

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Under the regime, everyone is free. It's just that some people are more free than others.

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

Yeah this just shows you don't have any rights. You have temporary, revocable privileges, depending on the whims of those exercising power.

[–] ileftreddit@piefed.social 23 points 22 hours ago

Death to fascists

[–] crystalmerchant@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago

Lmao turns out it was never about free speech at all. Just about control and power. Shocked

[–] xenomor@lemmy.world 21 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

These republicans, like Charlie Kirk, wrap themselves in Christianity but are the least Christ-like people on the planet. These same frauds tout their patriotism, and stoke national identity while throwing the founding document and our foundational rights, and the rule of law out the window at every opportunity they find to seize power and profit.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago

Most conservatives worship Satan. They're literally devil-worshipers. If your religion leads you to hate, you are not worshiping a benevolent god, you're worshiping the Devil. Charlie Kirk was a devil worshiper and he's now joined his master, where he will burn in the fires of Hell for all the misery he brought down upon his innocent victims. All billionaires go to Hell. Most Republicans go to Hell. Any "Christian" that preaches hate is bound for the the Pit.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 12 points 23 hours ago

"Free speech absolutists", everyone.

I'm sure Musk and other people that were outraged over things like Hunter's hard drive, oops, I mean "laptop" and social media/news outlets will be all over this, right? The people that were parroting mindless talking points about Confederates being "shadow banned" on a private platform.

Right?

[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

So they want to keep people who say things they don't like IN the country now? I'll never understand the Bizarro world we live in.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 6 points 22 hours ago

Another day another treason 🥱

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 5 points 1 day ago

Please read H.R. 5300, SEC. 226. NO PASSPORTS FOR TERRORISTS AND TRAFFICKERS

https://midwest.social/post/35310527